Judge Strikes Down Key Part of Strict Washington D.C. Gun Law
(WASHINGTON)— A federal judge in Washington halted enforcement of a portion of the city’s strict gun law Tuesday in a ruling that conflicts with a previous judge’s assessment of the law and sets up two competing views for a higher court.
U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Leon ruled Tuesday that a section of the city’s law that requires people who want to carry a gun in public to show a “good reason to fear injury” or another “proper reason” to carry the weapon “likely places an unconstitutional burden” on citizens’ right to bear arms.
Leon’s decision to grant a preliminary injunction stands in contrast to a ruling by his colleague, U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who sided with the city in a separate dispute earlier this year and declined to issue a preliminary injunction. Kollar-Kotelly said that opponents had not shown that their lawsuit was likely to be successful, leading her to deny the request for a preliminary injunction. She also noted that appeals courts in other parts of the country had approved of laws in New York, New Jersey and Maryland that are similar to the District of Columbia’s.
Kollar-Kotelly was nominated by a Democrat, President Bill Clinton, and Leon by a Republican, President George W. Bush.
The city can appeal Tuesday’s ruling and may also ask Leon to put on hold his ruling while they appeal. Robert P. Marus, a spokesman for the Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia, which has been defending the city’s law, said the office is reviewing the ruling.
Tuesday’s case involves a District of Columbia resident, Matthew Grace, and a shooting group he belongs to, the Pink Pistols. They are challenging the city’s requirement that a person who wants to carry a concealed handgun outside the home show he or she has a “good reason to fear injury to his or her person or property” or another “proper reason” for carrying the weapon. Reasons might include a personal threat, or a job that requires a person to carry or protect cash or valuables.
Leon characterized the city’s law as an “understandable, but overly zealous, desire to restrict the right to carry in public a firearm for self-defense to the smallest possible number of law-abiding, responsible” citizens.
“Because the right to bear arms includes the right to carry firearms for self-defense both in and outside the home, I find that the District’s ‘good reason’ requirement likely places an unconstitutional burden on this right,” he wrote in a 46-page ruling.
Charles Cooper, an attorney representing Grace and the shooting group, said Tuesday he was “really gratified” by the ruling but that it would not surprise him if the city immediately appeals.
